the_mysterious_mr_enterfandomcom-20200214-history
Part II of Homer Badman
Homer Badman is going to be one of those review like Screams of Silence or Peter-Assment, where it needs one part to talk about the actual episode and the second part where it talks about how it relates to the larger picture. With Screams of Silence, I talked about how Domestic Abuse campaigns and charities and "awareness" tend to sacrifice the real to talk about the extreme. And as such, it discriminates against everyone who doesn't fit the mold. Men, gays and lesbians, transpeople, women who aren't being physically abused or who have a boy over 12 years old. Oh look, Australia is making pet-happy shelters because according to them leaving a pet in an abusive home could cause more duress than leaving a 13 year old boy in an abusive home: www.theguardian.com/lifeandsty… With Peter-Assment, I talked about how assuming all men are perverts creates a lot of societal problems. Oh look, a news report from yesterday where a father of one was killed by vigilantes because they thought he was a pedophile: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/… ---- With Homer Badman I can talk about a lot. In the first part, I talk a lot about the problem with lynch mobs and how news media and TMZ-style reporting is terrible. I'm assuming that by now, you know the details of the episode, and I'm not sure what I want to talk about, specifically. What don't I want to talk about? I don't want to talk about the April-Tobuscus thing. By the way, I've been planning this review for awhile. It's actually a coincidence that this decided to coincide with that. Do you really want my opinion? Innocent until proven guilty. For both of them. The people who are calling April a vindictive liar because "innocent until proven guilty" are massive hypocrites. "But if you think April is innocent... and you think Tobuscus is innocent because neither have been proven guilty... what are you?" I'm impartial. I don't know these people. I wasn't there during the events. I'm not on the jury. I'm not a lawyer. And when the police aren't going to be involved, no one is ever going to get any answers beyond their own impressions. The only people I know are guilty of something bad for certain are the YouTube drama channels getting tons of ad revenue and viewership off of someone else's misfortune. Remember: small minds talk about people; average minds talk about events; and large minds talk about ideas. The most obvious thing to talk about are false allegations and what they can do to people. I mean, one of the reasons cited most by why rape victims didn't come forward was because they didn't think they'd be believed. Well, do you think these high profile not guilty verdicts are doing anything to shatter that impression? I truly do believe that most false allegations are because the authorities got the wrong guy, and a crime did actually occur. And that would lead me to how colleges and universities are dealing with rape accusations - by creating kangaroo courts, shifting the burden of proof, and basically deciding that a guy is guilty the second he's accused. Well... if a woman was actually raped, and she pointed out the wrong guy (or the police did), well... not only does the rape victim not get justice, but an innocent man gets his life destroyed, and out of all of this if the rapist never rapes again he got away with it. Any justice system can put a person in jail, but ours is designed to put the right people in jail. It doesn't help that the very small percentage of women who falsely claimed to have been raped try to make it as high profile as possible, as we've seen in the past few years. I thought about delving into more of these scare tactic statistics, and how they're used to drum up the hysteria that Homer Badman displays. For instance RAINN says that out of every 9 rapists that are prosecuted, only 5 of them lead to a felony conviction. This means that the other 4 were given a Not Guilty verdict. According to RAINN, Homer Simpson would be "a sexual harasser who never spent a day in jail." These same people tell me that one of the biggest reasons that women don't report rape or sexual harassment is a lack of trust in the criminal justice system. I know that the courts aren't perfect, and going to the police isn't always easy. Unfortunately, the only way for a rapist to go to prison is for a rape victim to report them. Our justice system definitely isn't perfect, but it's the best way we have of dealing with things. Lynch mobs are not. It's easy to say you're doing this in effort to "believe the victim" but remember that sympathy and kindness and caring can easily be morphed and swayed to wrath and vengeance. I've heard this quite recently "courts are not arbiters of truth." You're right, but they are arbiters of justice. The only ones we really have. Another thing I wanted to talk about is some of the changes of the law and, once again, how college is dealing with the perceived flaws of the criminal justice system. Back to scare statistics first though. Colleges and universities say that 1 in 5 women are raped or sexually assaulted in a four year stay. This is 20%. Out of curiosity, do you know how much chance a man has of being raped or sexually assaulted in prison? You know, a place where essentially it's never prosecuted at all? 40 per 1000, or 4%. Would sending my daughter to college really put her at five times the risk of sexual assault than putting my son in prison? The truth is no. Instead of 1 in 5, try 1 in over 50. It's still way too many, but it's not 20%. But why would a college do this? Let me guess at your seminar about these statistics - "This is a serious problem but we've got all of these facilities to prevent this from happening." It's a tactic called problem-reaction-solution. Airplane hijacking is a major problem. I don't let anyone disagree with me, and reveal that this is actually very rare. I introduce the TSA, which does nothing and is security theater. And then people praise me when they see that there are no airplane hijackings. Problem-reaction-solution. It's a business model. The more they can make you afraid, the more they can make you feel safer, making their product look better. Problem: a rape epidemic on campus. Solution? Well, let's have seminars on teaching people not to rape. Reaction? It seems that more people know that rape is bad. Listen, ladies and gentlemen, if you've gotten to college without being arrested, I'm fairly certain that you know what boundaries are and that "no means no." Especially since most teens seem to be sexually active before they get to college. Another solution - affirmative consent laws. It states "lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent." So, even if you were recording the encounter and you signed a contract, someone could later on decide that a consensual sexual encounter was rape. And your tape proving that no one said no, means that you were there and having sex with that person and failed to read their mind or had the body language reading powers of Dr. Cal Lightman. Also, it has a backfire effect. Remember, during a sexual encounter, whoever you are, man or woman, you have the right to say no at any time for any reason and stop the encounter. However, the only person who can say no on your behalf, is you. The law can't, and neither can your partner. They may say no on their own behalf, but they cannot do it on your behalf. The best way to end a sexual encounter that has become uncomfortable is to let your partner know and let them know firmly, not just lie there and wait for him or her to realize. Your partner is not a mind reader. So a law like that doesn't actually make you safer. It sure has hell makes you feel safer right. It's called security theater. These colleges and universities started doing this because some were started to be sued under Title IX for not taking sexual assault victims seriously. And now, the Homer Badman style lynch mob is standard justice there. Accusation, mob destroys their life, no due process. This is why most of the high profile cases that have turned out to be false have come from colleges and universities. With no due process, yes, more people will be falsely accused. Not only does it make it harder for wider society to believe victims, but when these people are falsely accused they're starting to sue these colleges and universities which will definitely lead to a backlash effect. ---- Those are the major topics I want to talk about: - how we can provide justice for both victims and those falsely accused. - how this lynch mob hysteria helps absolutely no one and harms those we try to help. - Or what a justice system looks like, run on lynch mob mentality. A lot of these are very intertwined. I need to know which one of these you would think would be the most important to talk about, or if you think that all of these topics could be a little more orderly. Category:Miscellaneous